What are the 11 professional categories listed by the U.S. Department of Education and where is the official source?

1. What reporting says the “11 professional categories” are, and how definitive is that number?

Multiple higher-education organizations reporting on the negotiated rulemaking session say the Department of Education and its Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE) committee agreed to recognize only 11 primary programs as professional degree programs for the purpose of the new loan limits ^[1]. New America’s coverage and other summaries note ED used prior regulatory definitions and produced a draft rubric during the session, but they describe a shifting proposal rather than a single finalized statutory list; reporting describes “10 fields” in one early ED proposal that later evolved in committee discussion ^[2]. In short: the number “11” appears in contemporary summaries of the committee’s draft consensus, but the precise, final list—by name and CIP or regulatory citation—is presented in committee materials rather than a single standalone ED page in the articles cited ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Why this list matters for students and programs

Under OBBBA and the department’s implementation approach, designation as a “professional degree” decides which borrowers access higher annual and aggregate loan limits: professional-degree students would be eligible for larger limits ($50,000 annual / $200,000 aggregate) compared with other graduate students ($20,500 annual / $100,000 aggregate); Grad PLUS would be terminated for new borrowers starting July 1, 2026, which heightens the practical stakes of which fields are labeled “professional” ^[2]. Consequently, institutions and professional schools—especially in health and social-work fields—warn that exclusion from the list could restrict student access to federal financing and reshape workforce pipelines ^{[4] [5]}.

3. Where to find the official source (and what reporting used instead)

The U.S. Department of Education’s website (ed.gov) is the official repository for agency rules, notices, and regulatory materials; it’s the authoritative place to look for final rules, notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRMs), and Dear Colleague Letters referenced by ED staff ^{[3] [6]}. Reporting and advocacy pieces, however, rely on RISE committee summaries and institutional analyses—e.g., Association of American Universities (AAU) reporting on the committee consensus and New America’s rulemaking takeaways—because those documents capture negotiated draft regulations even before they become final regulatory text ^{[1] [2]}. If you need the formal legal list once it is finalized, the ED rulemaking docket and the Federal Register/NPRM posted via ED pages and regulations.gov are the legal sources (reporting points to forthcoming NPRMs and Dear Colleague guidance as the ED channels) ^{[6] [7]}.

4. Who is contesting the proposed definitions — and why

Professional and public-health associations, such as the Council on Social Work Education and ASPPH (public health), have publicly criticized the department’s initial and committee proposals because they say key health and allied-health degrees—including some public health, social work, and advanced practice nursing programs—could be excluded, reducing access to higher loan limits and threatening workforce pipelines ^{[4] [5]}. Conversely, ED officials and some negotiators framed the redefinition as a legal and fiscal necessity to implement OBBBA and to constrain borrowing limits in line with the statute; ED also signaled it will use mechanisms like Dear Colleague Letters to clarify legacy provisions to institutions ^{[6] [2]}.

5. Limitations, remaining questions, and next steps

Current reporting establishes the committee’s draft consensus and the number “11,” but none of the cited pieces reproduces a definitive, itemized official list from an ED final rule text—available reporting largely references committee outcomes and advocacy reactions rather than a published final regulation on ed.gov or in the Federal Register ^{[1] [2] [3]}. To verify the exact program names, CIP codes, and legal definitions, consult the Department of Education’s rulemaking docket and the forthcoming Notice of Proposed Rulemaking or Dear Colleague Letter on ed.gov and regulations.gov; reporting indicates ED plans to publish NPRMs and guidance that will show the explicit list and rubric ^{[6] [3]}.

If you want, I can search ED’s rulemaking docket and recent NPRMs (regulations.gov and ed.gov) to locate the draft or final regulatory text that lists the 11 programs and their CIP codes; that would give the explicit, legally operative list rather than the summary accounts in the education press and advocacy releases ^{[3] [7]}.